[needs-packaging] NewGenLib - integrated library management system (ILS)

[Tree MendUs]

URL:
http://www.verussolutions.biz/web/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewGenLib

Description:
NewGenLib is an integrated library management system developed by Verus Solutions Pvt Ltd and the Kesavan Institute of Information and Knowledge Management in Hyderabad, India. NewGenLib version 1.0 was released in March 2005. On 9th January 2008, NewGenLib was declared Open Source Software under GNU GPL Licence by Verus Solutions.[1]

The software modules are:

    * Acquisitions
    * Cataloguing
    * Serials management
    * Circulation
    * Administration
    * OPAC
    * End-of-day process (daily scheduler) reports.

The system allows the creation of open access (OA) institutional repositories compliant with OAI-PMH. It is web-based software and has a multi-tier architecture[2] using Java (a Swing-based librarian's GUI) and JBoss (J2EE-based application server). The default backend database is the open source PostgreSQL.

NewGenLib is compliant with MARC 21 format, has a MARC editor, and allows seamless bibliographic and authority data import into cataloguing templates. Form letter templates are configurable using OpenOffice 2.0 as ODT and htm.

SMTP mail servers can be configured for emails that can be sent from functional modules. NewGenLib servers are SRU/W compliant supporting MARC-21 and MODS 3.0 metadata formats. CQL (level 1) with both Bath and Dublin Core Profiles are supported. NewGenLib is Unicode 3.0 compliant and is RFID ready.

NewGenLib can be installed on Linux and Windows operating systems.

    * Freedom: Available under GNU GPL v3
    * Functional modules are completely web based. Uses Java Web Start™ Technology
    * Compatibility - Complies with international metadata and interoperability standards: MARC-21, MARC-XML, z39.50, SRU/W, OAI-PMH
    * Uses chiefly open source components
    * Scalable, manageable and efficient
    * OS independent - Windows and Linux flavours available
    * z39.50 Client for federated searching
    * Internationalized application (I18N)
          o Unicode 3.0 complaint
          o Arabic version available
          o Easily extensible to support other languages
          o Data entry, storage, retrieval in any (Unicode 3.0) language
    * RFID integration
    * Networking – Hierarchical and Distributed networks
    * Automated email/instant messaging integrated into different functions of the software
    * Form letters are configurable and use XML-based OpenOffice templates
    * Extensive use of set up parameters enabling easy configuration of the software to suit specific needs, e.g., in defining patron privileges
    * Supports multi-user and multiple security levels
    * Allows digital attachments to metadata

License: GNU GPL Licence
http://www.verussolutions.biz/web/node/27

[Iain Lane (laney)]

Please don't mark bugs as affecting backports until there is actually a package to backport. It generates a lot of unnecessary mail to developers.

[Tree MendUs (tree-mendus-deactivatedaccount)]

Hi Iain,

I am so sorry - I didn't realize that backports were not meant to be requested if the package was not already in the repository for a later version of Ubuntu.

I have set just about all the other backport requests to "incomplete" since I can neither delete them or bookmark them for use in future.
Hopefully that will save the launchpad admins a lot of trouble.

But now I had been having trouble logging on and remaining at the launchpad site.
So it has been difficult checking for loose ends.

One of the admins sent me a message calling my submissions "Spam".
Yes - there were a lot of them, and yes - they all were submitted in quick succession.
But I did not do this with any malicious intent that is implied by the use of the word "Spam"

I went to a lot of effort to find, collect, and submit those packages,
and it is very disheartening to have these problems.

I am sorry.
But the system has not made it easy to fix the problem.

I hope to soon be certain that I have sorted the respective submissions and marked then as "incomplete".
I also hope to send an email to you and some other admins,
because this experience has some lessons.

Thank you.
Tree

[Michael Casadevall (mcasadevall)]

I was the one who requested your ban, due to the massive amounts of spam to our trackers, and the resulting backscatter of email to every backports developer (I believe at least 400 emails if not more were sent). The resulting influx of now invalid bugs has made the trackers you spammed (and it is spam) unusable since we can't easily find valid requests among all the garbage, and I've asked LP staff to delete all the bugs you filed against our trackers.

It is rude to file so many bugs without discussing it with the project administrators, especially if there was a chance if these bugs were invalid. Furthermore, there is a VERY clear criteria for what qualifies for a backport and what doesn't, and it quite clear that you didn't bother to check the page on the proper way to request a backport. I ask that you please stop touching any bugs on our trackers; we will close these bugs ourselves, and ask that you do not file any backport requests until you are clearly familiar with the process. Taking the [needs-packaging] bug, and subscribing it to the backports trackers is NOT the way to request a backport!

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports - Please read this.

[Chris Coulson (chrisccoulson)]

On Fri, 2008-09-19 at 14:02 +0000, Michael Casadevall wrote:
> I was the one who requested your ban, due to the massive amounts of spam
> to our trackers, and the resulting backscatter of email to every
> backports developer (I believe at least 400 emails if not more were
> sent). The resulting influx of now invalid bugs has made the trackers
> you spammed (and it is spam) unusable since we can't easily find valid
> requests among all the garbage, and I've asked LP staff to delete all
> the bugs you filed against our trackers.
>
> It is rude to file so many bugs without discussing it with the project
> administrators, especially if there was a chance if these bugs were
> invalid. Furthermore, there is a VERY clear criteria for what qualifies
> for a backport and what doesn't, and it quite clear that you didn't
> bother to check the page on the proper way to request a backport. I ask
> that you please stop touching any bugs on our trackers; we will close
> these bugs ourselves, and ask that you do not file any backport requests
> until you are clearly familiar with the process. Taking the [needs-
> packaging] bug, and subscribing it to the backports trackers is NOT the
> way to request a backport!
>
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports - Please read this.
>
> ** Changed in: gutsy-backports
> Status: Incomplete => Invalid
>
> ** Changed in: feisty-backports
> Status: Incomplete => Invalid
>
Michael,

Are all of these backport tasks being invalidated? If so, do you want
some help? There's quite a substantial number to go through.

Cheers
Chris

[Tree MendUs (tree-mendus-deactivatedaccount)]

Hi Guys,

I am so sorry, for All this trouble.

I am putting together a more in-depth message.
In brief -

I had gone through yesterday, and marked the backports bug reports as "incomplete" (as promised above),
so a search of my bug reports marked "backport" and also "incomplete" should help make it easier to find them.

I did this as per
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/252522
Chris Coulson
"Setting backport tasks incomplete as there is no package to backport yet".

Shall I go through and mark them as "invalid"?
There's about 180 programs requested for backports, in pairs of Feisty and Gutsy making about 360.
Since they are in pairs they can both be done at once.
Let me know , and I will get onto this at once?

So very Sorry.
Tree

[Ian Weisser (ian-weisser)]

Not currently in Ubuntu or Debian
License GPLv3
Changing from 'New' to 'Confirmed'. Recommend Wishlist